Reed Olsen, a vegetable farmer who works four acres of land in Barton over the pipeline, walks on his land Feb. He opposes transport of tar-sands oil via the pipe. / MADDIE MCGARVEY/FREE PRESS

Written by

Free Press Staff Writer

A pipeline warning sign stands on 4 Acre Farm in Barton. Farmers Reed Olsen and Adam Favaloro lease the land and oppose transport of Western Canadian tar- sands oil through the pipeline, which currently moves a lighter oil from South Portland, Maine to Montreal. / MADDIE MCGARVEY/FREE PRESS

A warning sign marking the pipeline stands across the street from 4 Acre Farm in Barton. / MADDIE MCGARVEY/FREE PRESS

Related Links

BARTON — When Reed Olsen works the land at 4 Acre Farm, he is sometimes reminded of the pipeline underneath the soil that transports crude oil through Vermont on its way from Maine to Montreal.

“I can hear it gurgling sometimes,” Olsen said.

The pipeline corridor buried under his tomato rows and blueberry patch has been in the ground since the 1940s — and until recently it generated scant attention.

Now the 59-mile chunk of the pipeline that cuts across Vermont’s Northeast Kingdom en route to Canada is the subject of at least 24 resolutions on Vermont town meeting ballots or agendas.

They carry the same message: Don’t allow the pipeline to be used to transport tar sands from vast deposits in Western Canada to East Coast ports where ships would carry it to refineries.

Environmentalists contend that reversing the flow of the pipe and transporting tar sands, also sometimes called oil sands, to the coast would be a monumental mistake. It would hasten the expansion of oil-sands development that damages lakes and forests in Canada and contributes to global warming, they warn. Critics also say transporting the thick, heavy oil-sands product presents a greater risk of pipeline corrosion and spills than transporting other types of oil.

Those contentions are disputed by Larry Wilson, president of pipe owner Portland-Montreal Pipeline Co.

Should customers ask, the pipeline could safely transport oil sands, Wilson said. And although there is no active plan to move oil sands, the company is interested in doing just that should the market call for it.

“It would be a pleasure and opportunity to support our Canadian neighbors by helping with their energy transportation needs,” Wilson said.

That possibility worries environmentalists such as Reed and his partner at 4 Acre Farm, Adam Favaloro. They’ve joined in the fight led by Vermont environmentalist Bill McKibben and the groups 350.org and 350 Vermont to oppose reversal of flow in the Portland-Montreal pipeline.

Earlier this month McKibben was arrested in front of the White House with national tar-sands protesters. At least three busloads of Vermonters went to Washington last weekend for the Forward on Climate rally. They loudly voiced opposition to the Keystone XL Pipeline expansion from Alberta, Canada, south into and through the United States.

(Page 2 of 4)

As political pressure mounts to block oil-sands-pipeline expansion from Alberta to the west and south, many believe oil companies will look more aggressively at options heading east, even though this route offers less access to refineries and would require patching together pipeline between Alberta and Montreal.

“Unless people stand up and say ‘no,’ they will find a way to make it work,” Reed said. “There’s no doubt in my mind.”

Pipeline travels

The Portland-Montreal Pipeline stretches for 236 miles from South Portland, Maine, on the Atlantic Ocean to Montreal. It runs through rural Maine and New Hampshire and the upper northeast corner of Vermont before it heads into Canada. Ships unload crude oil at a tank farm in South Portland with 3.5 million barrels of storage capacity.

The first pipeline in the corridor to Montreal was installed in 1941. That pipe is no longer used. Another pipe 18 inches in diameter was added in 1950, and a third, 24-inch pipeline was laid in 1965. The three pipes run parallel.

The company maintains several pumping stations along the route, including one in Sutton, a short drive from scenic Crystal Lake in Vermont. Most of the company’s Vermont property easements were negotiated long ago with private landowners. The pipeline company has one Vermont employee and sends others in from out of state when needed.

The company pays property taxes on the pipeline corridor to various towns: $103,279 annually in Sutton, $59,989 in Barton, $1,162 in Lunenberg.

Most of the pipeline in Vermont sits out of sight, six feet under ground. Occasionally it peaks up. At 4 Acre Farm, a section of pipeline in a stream was exposed after Tropical Storm Irene. There was no spill, and the company re-buried the section with rock and earth.

But farmer Favaloro was not reassured by company promises that the pipeline is safe. Another big storm could come along and expose the pipeline again, making it more vulnerable to spills, he said. The soil in the floodplain where 4 Acre Farm is located is rich and fertile, but all that could change with an accident, he worried.

(Page 3 of 4)

“A big oil spill right here could have a huge impact on this fertile valley,” Favaloro said. “All this good soil would probably be poisoned.”

The oil pipeline is mostly underground, but it’s not invisible. The route is well-marked with warning signs, and in some stretches the land above it is cut and cleared.

Road names reference the pipeline, and so do sledding hills. The pumping station in Sutton is surrounded by a chain-link fence and sits along a frost-heaved country highway. The collection of small, institutional green buildings stands out in the surrounding woods.

Last summer, environmentalists led a walk along the pipeline to illustrate its path though woods and fields, byways and the shadow of Interstate 91.

The group camped out at 4 Acre Farm.

Andy Simon, staff organizer for 350 Vermont, was part of the effort. He said Vermont’s Northeast Kingdom and rural communities in Maine and New Hampshire can only lose if the pipeline is used to transport tar sands.

“It’s really all pain and no gain,” Simon said. “It’s all risk and no benefit. The oil does not flow to these communities and these states; there are no jobs that would be added unless, of course, there were a spill. And no wants to see that kind of situation.”

On a broader level, he opposes flow reversal out of the belief that it would expand tar-sands development and fossil-fuel pollution.

If society continues to go in the direction the oil companies want it to go in — continued dependence on oil and natural gas — the result would be an uninhabitable planet, Simon said: “And we have no Planet B.”

The Keep Vermont Tar Sands Free town-meeting resolution being championed by 350 Vermont asks communities to call upon the Vermont Legislature and the U.S. Congress to ensure environmental-impact reviews of any tar-sands-related proposals.It’s unclear if flow reversal would require a permit under Vermont’s state environmental law, Act 250. Environmentalists have asked a regional environmental commission for a jurisdictional ruling on the question.

(Page 4 of 4)

The oil product from the Alberta tar sands does not gush black and thick from the ground. It is extracted from sand at open pit mines and treated with water and chemicals to produce an oil product for refineries.

Oil companies say it’s wise to invest in North American energy sources. Environmentalists point to pollution problems, the large amount of energy used to extract tar sands, and increased threat of global warming.

In January, a study by a biologist at Queen’s University in Ontario found that oils-sands development produced elevated levels of cancer-causing compounds in lakes nearby. Critics of the study said the levels were, with one exception, within Canadian water-safety guidelines and lower than most urban lakes.

But other environmental studies have raised concerns about chemicals spreading into water systems from waste water at oil-sands pits or from the air as excavators scoop tons of tar sand and load it into trucks to be processed. Forest destruction is another concern, as land is clear-cut and scraped for oil-sands mining.

Oil companies maintain the product is no worse than other types of oil and should be developed to help North America wean itself from Middle Eastern oil supplies. It does not make sense for the U.S. to ignore energy sources in a friendly nation right next door, Wilson said.

“The oil sands is a responsible, environmentally sound source of oil,” said Wilson of the Portland-Montreal Pipeline Co.

The company has no current plan to reverse the flow and transport heavy oil from Western Canada, Wilson said, repeating what he has told Vermont legislators in recent testimony in Montpelier. However, the executive also makes plain that should the company be asked to transport tar sands, it would seek to do so.

“We’re considering every opportunity to make excellent use and maximize the value, if you will, of our outstanding asset,” he said.

The pipeline is designed to transport any grade of crude oil — light or heavy, Wilson said.To reverse the flow and transport tar sands oil, the company might need new infrastructure in Montreal, such as an originating station, and different equipment in South Portland, Maine. Instead of a tank farm designed to receive oil from incoming ships, the company would need a facility designed to load oil onto ships that would then carry it to refineries.

Wilson also said that pumping-station work would need to be done.

“For the pipeline to be reversed, if that ever were to be an opportunity for us, we would make some infrastructure changes at some of the facilities to simply pump in a reverse direction,” he said.

Setting up to transport tar sands would not be a complex project, in Wilson’s estimation: “It is not a project that is a particular challenge or one that can’t be brought to the market and brought to bear.”

But such a project for the moment is not active, partly because of the challenge of moving oil from Alberta to Montreal, Wilson added: “Western Canadian crude is not available in sufficient supply today in Eastern Canada to warrant a project like a reversal project.”